Talk:Numerals in Unicode

Ancient Greek Numerals

The document describing the Unicode Supplementary Multilingual Plane entities for ancient Greek numeral forms can be found here. Larry 04:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Ancient Greek Numerals table, I found that despite having selected, in the font settings for the Chromium-based Edge browser, a font that contains symbols for U_10140 to U+1018E, the table for Ancient Greek Numerals displayed empty boxes. On examination, I found that the table specifies Google's Noto Sans Symbol2 font, and all I had to do was install this font in Windows for the symbols to be displayed correctly. I've added this comment in case it helps someone view the correct symbols in the table. StefanosPavlos (talk) 16:47, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Characters for irrational numbers, sets and other constants

The Planck constant is a dimensional quantity, not a number. It does not differ, conceptually, from a unit of measurement. Something is apparently misunderstood either in the standard or in this interpretation. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 14:03, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear wording

The into contains:

"The decimal digits are repeated in 23 separate blocks: twice in Arabic. Six additional blocks contain the digits again as rich text or legacy software compatibility characters"

It's not being made cleat why there is a colon after "blocks", it looks like it's starting a list to explain the details of the 23 seperate blocks, but it fizzles out after two and six.

I don't actually understand what that sentence is supposed to convey --79.173.244.169 (talk) 01:14, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So, why the Roman numerals block?

From the section on Roman numerals:

One reason for the existence of pre-combined numbers is to facilitate the setting of multiple-letter numbers (such as VIII) in a single "square" in Asian vertical text. Another reason is for 12-hour clock-face use.

...

The characters in the range U+2160–217F are present only for compatibility with other character set standards which provide these characters.

This seems contradictory: first use cases is presented, but then these are effectively negated. Which is the rationale for including these characters in Unicode? QVVERTYVS (hm?) 16:08, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomenclature

The article is very unclear about the distinction between what Unicode calls 'European digits' (i.e. 0123456789, traditionally & confusingly called 'Arabic numerals') and the different numeral characters used in other scripts such as Arabic. I believe Unicode uses the term 'Arabic-Indic' to refer to two similar but distinct sets of characters used in different parts of the Middle & Far East, quite different from the European characters. Ben Finn (talk) 21:04, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relatedly: I think this whole article confuses "digit" with "numeral": While a digit is a single character/code-point, a numeral is a *group* of digits — if my understanding is correct. (The difference between a `char` and a `String` in programming languages, if you like.) A "numeric character" is another name for "digit" as far as I can see, but "numeric character" is *not* the same as "numeral". (Perhaps the fact that a single-digit is also a sequence-of-just-one-digit can make things seemingly confusing.)

Upshot: Should this article should be re-named "Digits in unicode"? Or am I missing some obscure definition? not-just-yeti (talk) 15:43, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Backbone of the article is the Unicode general category Numeric_Type (§ Numerals by numeric property) and Hex_Digit (§ Hexadecimal digits). These also support calculating and ordering software functions (eg recognise + valuate hex values). With this, the number lists per script should be correct too.

The article is wider than just digits (which essence you describe well btw). For example, it covers also number-forming-from-digit-characters (classical decimal system or radix) 0-9, styled numbers not just digits (９ ¹ ① ⒈ 𝍭), over-9 numbers so not digits (Ⅹ Δ 百), and script-specific nondigits.

Yes the distinction between digit and number should be made consistently, as with styles. I end up: not "Digits in Unicode", but possibly Numbers in Unicode. -DePiep (talk) 16:24, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]